2019 年 28 巻 p. 72-82
In the jurisprudential understanding concerning the laws of education, the prevailing view on teachers’ continuing learning was dialogically shaped between the late 1960s and mid 1970s by two contrasting philosophical positions: One position emphasizes the people’s right to education, and the other stresses the State’s rights to educate its people.
These conflictive philosophical positions underlie the different legal interpretations given to Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Law for Special Regulations Concerning Educational Public Service Personnel (Special Regulations).
In respect to the prevailing jurisprudential understanding on teachers’ continuing learning, it is important to make a critical inquiry on legislative interpretations that limit the autonomy of individual schools over their administrative authority, such as the board of education. Furthermore, it is much needed to reevaluate the prevailing understanding that may be outdated to reflect the current conditions and realities in the field.
This paper identifies the dilemmas surrounding the legislative interpretation that excludes teachers' self-initiated continuing learning from teachers’ occupational responsibility. This paper also considers the ways to alleviate school principals’ from using their administrative authority to exclude teachers' self-initiated continuing learning from teachers' occupational responsibilities. In so doing, this paper aims to bring a paradigm shift to the prevailing jurisprudential understanding concerning the laws of education to revitalize the core principle of the Article 2 of Paragraph 22 of the Special Regulations.
